U.S. Department of Defense and U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
The Military and the
Endangered Species Act
Interagency Cooperation
The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD)
manages approximately 25 million acres
(10 million hectares) on more than 425
major military installations throughout the
United States. These installations serve as
the bedrock upon which the military
services conduct essential training, testing,
and basing, thereby providing for the
Nation’s common defense. For years,
access limits due to security considerations
and the need for safety buffer zones have
sheltered these lands from development
pressures and large-scale habitat losses.
Most military lands contain rare species
and fine examples of rare native plant
communities, such as old-growth forests,
tall-grass prairies, and vernal pool
wetlands. Over 300 federally listed species
live on DoD-managed lands.
Endangered species management on
military lands remains a challenging and
critical focus for DoD’s resource
managers. Successful endangered species
management ultimately depends upon the
resource manager’s skills and expertise, as
well as their use of available tools, training,
and resources. DoD’s continued
interagency cooperation and partnerships
with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(FWS) and the National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS ) are essential elements
toward these efforts.
DoD Guidance on Species Conservation
Since 1960, the Sikes Act has required
military installations to provide for the
conservation and rehabilitation of natural
resources on DoD lands. A recent
amendment, the Sikes Act Improvement
Act of 1997, requires DoD and its military
services (i.e., Army, Air Force, Navy and
Marine Corps) to prepare and implement
Integrated Natural Resources Management
Plans (INRMPs) for each military
installation with significant natural
resources. INRMPs aim for sustainable
natural resources management while
ensuring no net loss in the capability of
installation lands to support the
military mission.
DoD and each military service has
implementing instructions for compliance
with the Sikes Act, Endangered Species
Act (ESA), and other natural resources
laws and regulations. The following
outlines the main points of these
instructions as they pertain to ESA
compliance:
DoD Instruction, DoDI 4715.3:
Stipulates that procedures to comply with
ESA mandates shall emphasize military
mission requirements and interagency
cooperation during consultation, species
recovery planning, and management
activities.
Army Regulation, AR 200-3: States
that it is an Army goal to systematically
conserve biological diversity on Army
lands within the context of its mission.
U.S. Air Force Instruction 32-7064:
Stipulates that each Air Force installation
must develop an overall ecosystem
management strategy that provides for the
protection and recovery of threatened and
endangered species. Also, when practical, the
Air Force will provide the same protection
to candidate and state-listed species.
U.S. Navy Instruction, OPNAVINST
5090.1B: Stipulates that the Navy’s policy
is to act responsibly in the public interest
to restore, improve, preserve, and properly
utilize natural resources through
incorporating ecosystem management
principles on Navy lands. The Navy will
use its authorities to further programs for
the conservation and recovery of federally
listed endangered and threatened species.
Furthermore, the Navy encourages
cooperation with States and territories to
protect state/territory listed rare and
endangered species.
U.S. Marine Corps Order (MCO)
P5090.2A: States natural resources under
the stewardship and control of the Marine
Corps will be managed to support the
military mission, while preserving,
protecting, and enhancing these resources.
What are the Provisions of Section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act?
Section 7(a)(1) provides that all federal
agencies, in consultation with FWS and
NMFS, shall use their authorities to
further the purpose of ESA by carrying
out programs for the conservation of
endangered and threatened species.
Coexisting with
nature, Marines
train at Camp
Lejeune, North
Carolina, in the
midst of prime
habitat for the
endangered red-cockaded
woodpecker.
Section 7(a)(2) requires federal
agencies to ensure, in consultation with
FWS and/or NMFS, that any action
authorized, funded, or carried out is not
likely to jeopardize the continued existence
of any endangered or threatened species or
result in destruction or adverse
modification of critical habitat.
How does the Section 7 Process
(Interagency Cooperation) Work?
If a proposed DoD action may affect an
endangered or threatened species or
designated critical habitat, the agency
initiates consultation with the FWS or
NMFS, as appropriate.
Informal consultation consists of any
discussions between the federal agencies,
applicants, and FWS and/or NMFS to
determine if there are ways to avoid
adverse effects to listed species and
designated critical habitat from the
proposed project. If modifications are
developed to avoid all such effects,
consultation is concluded. It is FWS policy
to use informal consultation to the fullest
extent possible.
If adverse effects are unavoidable,
formal consultation is initiated. FWS
evaluates the status of the species, the
environmental baseline, and the effects of
the proposed action to determine if the
project may jeopardize the continued
existence of the listed species. If critical
habitat for the species is designated, the
FWS determines whether the project will
destroy or adversely modify critical
habitat.
As a result of formal consultation, the
FWS produces a document called a
Biological Opinion (BO). If the BO
concludes the action is not likely to
jeopardize the species or destroy or
adversely modify critical habitat, FWS will
provide an incidental take statement, which
anticipates the amount of take of the
species that may occur incidental to the
project. The incidental take statement also
includes reasonable and prudent measures
with specific terms and conditions to be
carried out by the federal agency or
applicant that will minimize incidental take.
The incidental take statement exempts the
federal agency and applicant from violating
the ESA for the specified amount of take.
If a BO concludes the proposed action
is likely to jeopardize the continued
existence of a species or destroy or
adversely modify designated critical
habitat, it provides reasonable and prudent
alternatives to the proposed action that will
avoid jeopardy or adverse modification or
destruction of critical habitat. Such
alternatives must be consistent with the
intended purpose of the action, be within
the authority of the federal agency, and be
technologically and economically feasible.
If the alternative action may result in
incidental take, an incidental take
statement will be included.
A BO also includes discretionary
conservation recommendations that guide a
federal agency in using its authorities to
further conserve endangered and
threatened species.
A federal agency or applicant may
request an exemption from complying with
reasonable and prudent alternatives set
forth in a BO by filing an appeal with the
Endangered Species Committee.
Exemptions granted by the Endangered
Species Committee are rare. However,
section 7 (j) provides for an exemption for
reasons of national security.
Involvement in the Listing and Critical
Habitat Designation Process
Because DoD lands support numerous
listed, proposed, and non-listed species,
DoD resource managers should be aware
of actions by FWS or NMFS to propose
new species for listing, place species on the
candidate list, and designate critical
habitat. These listings and critical habitat
designations may include species and areas
found on military lands. It is recommended
that DoD installations do the following:
Address listed species and designated
critical habitat in the development and
implementation of INRMPs.
Monitor announcements published in
the Federal Register, to be aware of
upcoming proposals for listing or
designations.
Provide comments on proposed actions.
Once a notice is published in the Federal
Register, installations usually will have 60
days to comment. Comments should be
solicited from all applicable installations,
major commands or claimants, and
headquarters, as necessary. Comments
should include:
Any data or information collected on
the installation about the species’
presence or its habitat.
Information on any increases in
economic and other relevant impacts
from critical habitat, such as increases
in administrative burden, conflicts with
military mission, and benefits of
proposed action.
Relevant provisions within an
existing INRMP.
Any other comments that may affect
and/or influence decision-making.
Under section 4(b)(2) of the ESA, an area
may be excluded from critical habitat if it is
determined that the benefits of exclusion
outweigh the benefits of specifying an area
as part of critical habitat.
Management Plans
When designating critical habitat, the FWS
determines whether an area needs
additional special management or
protection. If a conservation and
management plan, such as an INRMP,
already exists, the FWS may decide that
the area covered by the plan does not meet
the definition of critical habitat.
To qualify, plans/INRMPs must provide:
A conservation benefit to the species;
Ensured implementation of the plan;
and
Ensured effectiveness of conservation
efforts.
References
FWS’s Endangered Species Program
web page at http://endangered.fws.gov
offers a variety of information, such as up-to-
date lists of threatened and endangered
species, proposed and candidates species
for listing, state lists, Federal Register
notices for final and proposed actions, and
guidance and instructions.
The regulations for interagency
cooperation under ESA may be found in
the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations at
http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/
waisidx_00/50cfr402_00.html. The FWS/
NMFS consultation handbook may be
found at http://endangered.fws.gov.
To read the full text of the Sikes Act
Improvement Act or to learn more about
DoD’s natural resources conservation
program, see the Defense Environmental
Network & Information eXchange
(DENIX) web site at https://
www.denix.osd.mil/denix/Public/ES-Programs/
Conservation/
conservation.html.
September 2001

Click tabs to swap between content that is broken into logical sections.

U.S. Department of Defense and U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
The Military and the
Endangered Species Act
Interagency Cooperation
The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD)
manages approximately 25 million acres
(10 million hectares) on more than 425
major military installations throughout the
United States. These installations serve as
the bedrock upon which the military
services conduct essential training, testing,
and basing, thereby providing for the
Nation’s common defense. For years,
access limits due to security considerations
and the need for safety buffer zones have
sheltered these lands from development
pressures and large-scale habitat losses.
Most military lands contain rare species
and fine examples of rare native plant
communities, such as old-growth forests,
tall-grass prairies, and vernal pool
wetlands. Over 300 federally listed species
live on DoD-managed lands.
Endangered species management on
military lands remains a challenging and
critical focus for DoD’s resource
managers. Successful endangered species
management ultimately depends upon the
resource manager’s skills and expertise, as
well as their use of available tools, training,
and resources. DoD’s continued
interagency cooperation and partnerships
with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(FWS) and the National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS ) are essential elements
toward these efforts.
DoD Guidance on Species Conservation
Since 1960, the Sikes Act has required
military installations to provide for the
conservation and rehabilitation of natural
resources on DoD lands. A recent
amendment, the Sikes Act Improvement
Act of 1997, requires DoD and its military
services (i.e., Army, Air Force, Navy and
Marine Corps) to prepare and implement
Integrated Natural Resources Management
Plans (INRMPs) for each military
installation with significant natural
resources. INRMPs aim for sustainable
natural resources management while
ensuring no net loss in the capability of
installation lands to support the
military mission.
DoD and each military service has
implementing instructions for compliance
with the Sikes Act, Endangered Species
Act (ESA), and other natural resources
laws and regulations. The following
outlines the main points of these
instructions as they pertain to ESA
compliance:
DoD Instruction, DoDI 4715.3:
Stipulates that procedures to comply with
ESA mandates shall emphasize military
mission requirements and interagency
cooperation during consultation, species
recovery planning, and management
activities.
Army Regulation, AR 200-3: States
that it is an Army goal to systematically
conserve biological diversity on Army
lands within the context of its mission.
U.S. Air Force Instruction 32-7064:
Stipulates that each Air Force installation
must develop an overall ecosystem
management strategy that provides for the
protection and recovery of threatened and
endangered species. Also, when practical, the
Air Force will provide the same protection
to candidate and state-listed species.
U.S. Navy Instruction, OPNAVINST
5090.1B: Stipulates that the Navy’s policy
is to act responsibly in the public interest
to restore, improve, preserve, and properly
utilize natural resources through
incorporating ecosystem management
principles on Navy lands. The Navy will
use its authorities to further programs for
the conservation and recovery of federally
listed endangered and threatened species.
Furthermore, the Navy encourages
cooperation with States and territories to
protect state/territory listed rare and
endangered species.
U.S. Marine Corps Order (MCO)
P5090.2A: States natural resources under
the stewardship and control of the Marine
Corps will be managed to support the
military mission, while preserving,
protecting, and enhancing these resources.
What are the Provisions of Section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act?
Section 7(a)(1) provides that all federal
agencies, in consultation with FWS and
NMFS, shall use their authorities to
further the purpose of ESA by carrying
out programs for the conservation of
endangered and threatened species.
Coexisting with
nature, Marines
train at Camp
Lejeune, North
Carolina, in the
midst of prime
habitat for the
endangered red-cockaded
woodpecker.
Section 7(a)(2) requires federal
agencies to ensure, in consultation with
FWS and/or NMFS, that any action
authorized, funded, or carried out is not
likely to jeopardize the continued existence
of any endangered or threatened species or
result in destruction or adverse
modification of critical habitat.
How does the Section 7 Process
(Interagency Cooperation) Work?
If a proposed DoD action may affect an
endangered or threatened species or
designated critical habitat, the agency
initiates consultation with the FWS or
NMFS, as appropriate.
Informal consultation consists of any
discussions between the federal agencies,
applicants, and FWS and/or NMFS to
determine if there are ways to avoid
adverse effects to listed species and
designated critical habitat from the
proposed project. If modifications are
developed to avoid all such effects,
consultation is concluded. It is FWS policy
to use informal consultation to the fullest
extent possible.
If adverse effects are unavoidable,
formal consultation is initiated. FWS
evaluates the status of the species, the
environmental baseline, and the effects of
the proposed action to determine if the
project may jeopardize the continued
existence of the listed species. If critical
habitat for the species is designated, the
FWS determines whether the project will
destroy or adversely modify critical
habitat.
As a result of formal consultation, the
FWS produces a document called a
Biological Opinion (BO). If the BO
concludes the action is not likely to
jeopardize the species or destroy or
adversely modify critical habitat, FWS will
provide an incidental take statement, which
anticipates the amount of take of the
species that may occur incidental to the
project. The incidental take statement also
includes reasonable and prudent measures
with specific terms and conditions to be
carried out by the federal agency or
applicant that will minimize incidental take.
The incidental take statement exempts the
federal agency and applicant from violating
the ESA for the specified amount of take.
If a BO concludes the proposed action
is likely to jeopardize the continued
existence of a species or destroy or
adversely modify designated critical
habitat, it provides reasonable and prudent
alternatives to the proposed action that will
avoid jeopardy or adverse modification or
destruction of critical habitat. Such
alternatives must be consistent with the
intended purpose of the action, be within
the authority of the federal agency, and be
technologically and economically feasible.
If the alternative action may result in
incidental take, an incidental take
statement will be included.
A BO also includes discretionary
conservation recommendations that guide a
federal agency in using its authorities to
further conserve endangered and
threatened species.
A federal agency or applicant may
request an exemption from complying with
reasonable and prudent alternatives set
forth in a BO by filing an appeal with the
Endangered Species Committee.
Exemptions granted by the Endangered
Species Committee are rare. However,
section 7 (j) provides for an exemption for
reasons of national security.
Involvement in the Listing and Critical
Habitat Designation Process
Because DoD lands support numerous
listed, proposed, and non-listed species,
DoD resource managers should be aware
of actions by FWS or NMFS to propose
new species for listing, place species on the
candidate list, and designate critical
habitat. These listings and critical habitat
designations may include species and areas
found on military lands. It is recommended
that DoD installations do the following:
Address listed species and designated
critical habitat in the development and
implementation of INRMPs.
Monitor announcements published in
the Federal Register, to be aware of
upcoming proposals for listing or
designations.
Provide comments on proposed actions.
Once a notice is published in the Federal
Register, installations usually will have 60
days to comment. Comments should be
solicited from all applicable installations,
major commands or claimants, and
headquarters, as necessary. Comments
should include:
Any data or information collected on
the installation about the species’
presence or its habitat.
Information on any increases in
economic and other relevant impacts
from critical habitat, such as increases
in administrative burden, conflicts with
military mission, and benefits of
proposed action.
Relevant provisions within an
existing INRMP.
Any other comments that may affect
and/or influence decision-making.
Under section 4(b)(2) of the ESA, an area
may be excluded from critical habitat if it is
determined that the benefits of exclusion
outweigh the benefits of specifying an area
as part of critical habitat.
Management Plans
When designating critical habitat, the FWS
determines whether an area needs
additional special management or
protection. If a conservation and
management plan, such as an INRMP,
already exists, the FWS may decide that
the area covered by the plan does not meet
the definition of critical habitat.
To qualify, plans/INRMPs must provide:
A conservation benefit to the species;
Ensured implementation of the plan;
and
Ensured effectiveness of conservation
efforts.
References
FWS’s Endangered Species Program
web page at http://endangered.fws.gov
offers a variety of information, such as up-to-
date lists of threatened and endangered
species, proposed and candidates species
for listing, state lists, Federal Register
notices for final and proposed actions, and
guidance and instructions.
The regulations for interagency
cooperation under ESA may be found in
the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations at
http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/
waisidx_00/50cfr402_00.html. The FWS/
NMFS consultation handbook may be
found at http://endangered.fws.gov.
To read the full text of the Sikes Act
Improvement Act or to learn more about
DoD’s natural resources conservation
program, see the Defense Environmental
Network & Information eXchange
(DENIX) web site at https://
www.denix.osd.mil/denix/Public/ES-Programs/
Conservation/
conservation.html.
September 2001